DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office action is responsive to the Amendment/Remarks filed 02/02/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 1, filed 02/02/2026, with respect to claim limitations being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the examiner’s interpretation of claim limitations being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 2, filed 02/02/2026, with respect to claim 7 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 112(b) of claim 7 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 3, filed 02/02/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-4,6-12, and 14-20 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Kawashima, previously cited by the examiner, and Haines (US 12,554,952), newly cited by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-12, and 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawashima (US 11,403,474) in view of Haines (US 12,554,952).
Re claims 1, 7, 9, 15, and 17: Kawashima discloses an indicia reader comprising:
a housing (fig. 1; col . 6, lines 21-30);
an imaging assembly (110) housed within the housing, the imaging assembly including an image sensor (111) and an imaging lens assembly (112) configured to focus light onto the image sensor (col. 6, lines 48-67);
an illumination assembly (113) configured to illuminate a field of view of the image sensor (col. 7, lines 1-3);
a controller (121) operatively connected to the imaging assembly and the illumination assembly (figs. 1 and 7; col. 7, lines 4-19; and col. 7, lines 55-59 describes the functions of the respective parts of the reading device are realized by the CPU (121) controlling the respective parts by executing software or by dedicated control circuits), the controller being configured to cause the indicia reader to:
capture, via the imaging assembly, image data during a decoding session (col. 6, lines 51-63);
process the image data using the CPU to determine a presence of a display device within the field of view (col. 17, lines 21-48);
responsive to the presence of the display device within the field of view, maintaining the indicia reader or adjusting the indicia reader to operate in a first mode optimized for reading indicia on an electronic display (col. 17, line 24 to col. 18, line 53);
responsive to a lack of the presence of the display device within the field of view, maintaining the indicia reader or adjusting the indicia reader to operate in a second mode optimized for reading indicia on non-electronic-display media (col. 17, line 24 to col. 18, line 53); and
means for updating imaging history storing part based on images captured by the indicia reader (col. 7, lines 38-44; col. 14, lines 36 to col. 15, line 29).
Kawashima fails to teach a neural processing unit (NPU) configured to execute a machine learning model.
Haines discloses a code reader including a neural processing unit (NPU) configured to execute a machine learning model to facilitate object detection (col. 14, lines 6-24).
In view of Haines’ teachings, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate a neural processing unit within Kawashima’s device in order to improve reading rates of scanners in various environments.
Re claims 2, 10, and 18: Kawashima as modified by Haines further discloses wherein the display device is one of a cell phone, a cell phone held in a hand, or a computer display (Kawashima, col. 18, lines 5-8, 14-19, and 57-59).
Re claims 3, 11, and 19: Kawashima as modified by Haines further discloses wherein the decoding session is defined as lasting between a trigger to activate the imaging assembly in response to an external triggering event and at least one of a timeout period, receipt of a signal indicative of a successful decode of an indicia, or a signal indicative of a termination of the external triggering event (Kawashima, fig. 5; col. 14, lines 1-20).
Re claims 4 and 12: Kawashima as modified by Haines further discloses wherein the indicia reader is an imaging engine configured to be integrated into a data capture device (Kawashima, col. 6, lines 20-30).
Re claims 6, 14, and 20: Kawashima further wherein the CPU processes image data in parallel with a decoder module that handles indicia decoding (col. 8, lines 46-50; col. 17, line 24 to col. 18, line 53).
Kawashima fails to teach a neural processing unit (NPU).
Haines discloses a code reader including a neural processing unit (NPU) configured to execute a machine learning model to facilitate object detection (col. 14, lines 6-24).
In view of Haines’ teachings, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate a neural processing unit within Kawashima’s device in order to improve reading rates of scanners in various environments.
Re claims 8 and 16: Kawashima as modified by Haines further discloses the indicia reader of claim 1, wherein, in the first mode the illumination assembly is configured to provide less illumination during an exposure of the image sensor than in the second mode (Kawashima, col. 17, line 24 to col. 18, line 53).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach wherein the machine learning model is trained using a dataset comprising images of indicia on both electronic displays and non-electronic display media.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to APRIL A TAYLOR whose telephone number is (571)272-2403. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday between 9am-6pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, STEVEN S PAIK can be reached at 571-272-2404. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/APRIL A TAYLOR/Examiner, Art Unit 2876
/THIEN M LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights